Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Say “No” to smacking a week-old baby across the face.

"Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand”

So the bible-bashing zealots have got their way, and the country is to shortly pour nine-million dollars down-the-drain on a referendum, which when it has all been said and done, will probably do nothing.

This expense is unjustifiable at a time when New Zealand and the world economy are in a deep recession.

But now we are apparently lumbered with it, let’s see what we get when we answer “No” to ‘Focus on The Family’s’ appalling worded, ambiguous question (above).

1.) No, it shouldn’t be an offence to smack your child across the face with your fist as part of good parental correction. 2.) No, it shouldn’t be an offence for parents to smack a week old baby as part of so-called parental correction.

The way I read it, this is a possible interpretation of the wording in the poorly-worded question posed.

What exactly is a smack for starters?

Parents will be able to say in mitigation “I was only smacking them” when the child displays signs they received more that simple correction, smack on the bum.

This was exactly the mess we had before the law change.

And why stop with correcting children?

The originator of the petition is Sheyll Savill, and as it happens her husband is a policeman.

When Police-Constable Savill comes across some husband in his line of work, who has given his wife a “smacking” should he not feel pains of guilt at arresting them?

Would Constable Savill stand idly by while I slapped his wife?

Why does he then allow his wife smack his kids in an identical situation, without arresting her?

The answer is easy.

Sheyll Savill wants criminals who beat their children to escape justice, in pursuit of her own beliefs, which say specifically parents are justified using physical pain.

"Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him."

“Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die."

“Folly is bound up in the heart of a boy, but the rod of discipline drives it far away”

“Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell”

The Bible therefore specifically requires Christian parents to beat their children to prevent them slipping into Satan’s hands.

Beating is exactly the word used, not smacking, but beating.

Good Christian parents should employ rods, not the palm of your hands, but a form of weapon in the shape of a rod.

A baseball bat, or a piece of 4 x 2 timber fits the scriptures description well.

Then beat the living-crap out of the poor little sods, till the big-bad devil pops-out.

So from the orchestrator's ofThe Petitions perspective, this is not a question of freedoms, this is a question of rights.

These are not your or my biological off-spring.

They are Gods property.

The rights ordained to them in Gods best-seller, gives you and me the rights to beat-our-brats with impunity, on Gods behalf.